|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Mark L. Hopkins: More on guns and the Second Amendment
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A few months back I wrote a column entitled, "Guns don't kill people. Really?" My column usually will draw between 30 and 40 responses each week, some positive and some negative. The "Guns don't kill people," column kept me answering emails through much of the next week and beyond. Beginning today, I am going to write three columns that relate to the "gun" issue of The Second Amendment of the Constitution. The others will appear over the next couple of weeks. So, stay tuned. |
| Comment by:
dasing
(1/31/2017)
|
| If he ever would read how the framers of the Bill of Rights put together the amendments he would not be making the stupid statements about the 2A. It was not added in, for the Fed!! But for the States! They did NOT want a strong Fed, they wanted strong States! |
| Comment by:
Sosalty
(1/31/2017)
|
| I wish someone would publish just how many deaths are caused by NRA members using guns. I bet zero, zit, nada, possibly meniscal! |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
